An Open Letter to My Friend J.P.

Hi, there, J.P. --
What a surprise to receive an email message from you. I hope you and your family are doing well.

I attempted to read the Obama Health Care Plan only to discover that there isn't one. Currently, the only thing out there is HR 3200, which has been referred to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, Education and Labor, Oversight and Government Reform. I believe only one committee has reported it out so far. There's a long way to go before this legislation passes in the House, is reconciled with one from the Senate and is signed into law by President Obama. Only the Almighty knows what it will look like by then.

I currently carry three health care plans: Medicare, Tri-Care (my husband is retired Navy) and United Healthcare (part of my husband's retirement plan from Los Alamos National Laboratories). I recently had an annual physical, something which should be part of any good health-care program. Medicare and Tri-Care each paid their share; United Healthcare denied payment, and I had to pick up their share of the bill. And I'm not the only one: United Healthcare has a reputation for delays, denials, lies and outright fraud every time someone turns in a claim under one of its retiree insurance plans.

Routine denial of payment has become United Healthcare's stock-in-trade, and they've profited greatly from it. I'm sure you know that they've been successfully sued a number of times by individual patients, groups and states for their unsavory business practices. Unfortunately, the fines that resulted from these lawsuits haven't been enough to hurt them or their highly over-compensated management staff (2005 total compensation for United Health Care's CEO was $8.3 million, compared with: Wellpoint, Inc, $5.2 million; CIGNA, $4.7 million; Sierra Health, $3.4 million; Aetna, Inc, $3.3 million; Assurant, Inc, $2.3 million; Humana, $1.9 million; Health Net, $1.7 million). You may not consider this rationing and denial of care, but I sure do. Now these bandits are spending millions more to support scare advertising, disruption of town-hall meetings and "viral" emails like this one.

There is no provision in HR 3200 that denies care to ANYONE. The only thing that comes close enough to be labeled "rationing" or "denial" is in Sec 1751 (a), Medicaid non-payment for certain health care-acquired conditions. This provision, which denies payment for claims filed by doctors to correct their mistakes, has been in the Medicaid law all along. HR 3200 merely restates it. Go ahead; look up Sec 1751 in HR 3200 and see for yourself.

Fortunately, both copies of HR3200 that I've examined (the link in Janda's email and one from the Government Printing Office) are available in searchable text. Try this: search the document for National Health Care Board. IT AIN'T THERE! There is, however, a provision calling for a Clinical Prevention Stakeholders Board. Its purpose is to "advise the Task Force on developing, updating, publishing, and disseminating evidence-based recommendations on the use of clinical preventive services." A similar board, to provide the same advice on community prevention, is also called for. These "boards" report to a Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and the Task Force on Community Preventive Services respectively. Both task forces deal with PREVENTION, and have nothing whatsoever to do with approval or denial of care to the sick.

As for the role of ANY entity in denying care to ANYONE, then-Texas Governor George W. Bush signed into law revisions to The Texas Advance Directives Act, also known as the Texas Futile Care Law, which is now Chapter 166 of the Texas Health & Safety Code. It set up formal procedures to allow a health-care facility to discontinue life-sustaining treatment against the wishes of the patient or guardian ten days after giving written notice, if the continuation of treatment is considered medically inappropriate by the "treating medical team." Prior to Bush signing these revisions (in 1999 at the end of his tenure, I might add), no procedures were required for a hospital in Texas to deny care to a dying patient; the original law resulted in at least one death: six-month-old Sun Hudson, who had a lethal congenital malformation. How's that for "Right to Life!"

Here's another one to Google: Comparative Effectiveness Research (TITLE IV, Subtitle A). Janda claims that the purpose of the Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research is to "slow the development of new medications and technologies in order to reduce costs." Well, I guess it's possible that new meds and technologies might be slowed if they have to prove their effectiveness against existing meds and technologies, which is something they don't have to do now. The drug companies are currently under no obligation to test their drugs against existing treatments, only against placebos. That's one reason why we're seeing a plethora of new drugs on the market claiming to be effective for this condition or that, but are no better and in some cases worse than what's already around. I refer you to Powerful Medicine by Dr. Jerry Avorn (Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Chief of the Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics at Boston's Brigham and Women's Hospital) for a discussion of this deficiency and others in the FDA's new-drug approval process.

Hey, JP, I'm getting tired of having to present the truth behind Janda's claims. Why don't you look up the rest of them for yourself? Try the National Coordinator for Health Information and Technology, and let me know what you think.

So what are guys like Janda up to? What's with the "facism," "eugenics" and other inflammatory labels? Could it have to do with the Republican Party's call to defeat health-care legislation "at all costs," which they think will "crush" the Obama administration? George W. Bush just allowed one of America's all-time biggest fascists, Dick Cheney, to run his administration--and the country--into the ground. Did Democrats spend millions going around calling the administration "facist?"

No, I don't think this has anything to do with facism, or eugenics, or denial-of-care. I think it has to do with an over-bloated industry defending its right to go on cheating the American people unabated. And, I think has to do with whatever's left of the Republican Party, mostly far-right Southerners, attempting to defend their lilly-white world by bringing down a black president. What an unholy alliance.

There are a lot of legitimate arguments to make against HR 3200, the biggest being how to pay for the darned thing. But this crap only belies the greed, disingenuity and/or racism of its perpetrators. I really thought more highly of you than to fall for it, much less expect me to.
Linda

=================J.P.'s Original Message=============

From: J.P. Puette
To: J.P. Puette
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: Dr. Dave Janda: The One Word to Describe Obamacare - Facsist

This is not fear-mongering. If you have time to read the Obama Health Care Plan, you will be able to find that everything said here is true. Sounds a little like a "eugenics plan" to me!

Make your voices heard, or it will be your health plan.

J. P. Puette

Scary stuff, from HR 3200...

Subject: Fwd: Dr. Dave Janda: The One Word to Describe Obamacare - Fascist
Written by Dr. Dave Janda
Thursday, 23 July 2009

As a physician who has authored books on preventative health care, I was given the opportunity to be the keynote speaker at a Congressional Dinner at The Capitol Building in Washington last Friday (7/17).

The presentation was entitled Health Care Reform, The Power & Profit of Prevention, and I was gratified that it was well received.

In preparation for the presentation, I read the latest version of "reform" as authored by The Obama Administration and supported by Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid. Here is the link to the 1,018 page document:

Let me summarize just a few salient points of the above plan. First, however, it should be clear that the same warning notice must be placed on The ObamaCare Plan as on a pack of cigarettes: Consuming this product will be hazardous to your health.

The underlying method of cutting costs throughout the plan is based on rationing and denying care. There is no focus on preventing health care need whatever. The plan's method is the most inhumane and unethical approach to cutting costs I can imagine as a physician.

The rationing of care is implemented through The National Health Care Board, according to the plan. This illustrious Board "will approve or reject treatment for patients based on the cost per treatment divided by the number of years the patient will benefit from the treatment."

Translation.....if you are over 65 or have been recently diagnosed as having an advanced form of cardiac disease or aggressive cancer.....dream on if you think you will get treated.....pick out your coffin.

Oh, you say this could never happen? Sorry.... this is the same model they use in Britain.

The plan mandates that there will be little or no advanced treatments to be available in the future. It creates The Federal Coordinating Council For Comparative Effectiveness Research, the purpose of which is "to slow the development of new medications and technologies in order to reduce costs." Yes, this is to be the law.

The plan also outlines that doctors and hospitals will be overseen and reviewed by The National Coordinator For Health Information and Technology.

This " coordinator" will "monitor treatments being delivered to make sure doctors and hospitals are strictly following government guidelines that are deemed appropriate." It goes on to say....."Doctors and hospitals not adhering to guidelines will face penalties."

According to those in Congress, penalties could include large six figure financial fines and possible imprisonment.

So according to The ObamaCare Plan....if your doctor saves your life you might have to go to the prison to see your doctor for follow -up appointments. I believe this is the same model Stalin used in the former Soviet Union.

Section 102 has the Orwellian title, "Protecting the Choice to Keep Current Coverage." What this section really mandates is that it is illegal to keep your private insurance if your status changes - e.g., if you lose or change your job, retire from your job and become a senior, graduate from college and get your first job. Yes, illegal.

When Mr. Obama hosted a conference call with bloggers urging them to pressure Congress to pass his health plan as soon as possible, a blogger from Maine referenced an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance.

He asked: "Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?" Mr. Obama replied: "You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about."

Then there is Section 1233 of The ObamaCare Plan, devoted to "Advanced Care Planning." After each American turns 65 years of age they have to go to a mandated counseling program that is designed to end life sooner.

This session is to occur every 5 years unless the person has developed a chronic illness then it must be done every year. The topics in this session will include, "how to decline hydration, nutrition and how to initiate hospice care." It is no wonder The Obama Administration does not like my emphasis on Prevention. For Mr. Obama, prevention is the "enemy" as people would live longer.

I rest my case. The ObamaCare Plan is hazardous to the health of every American.

After I finished my Capitol Hill presentation, I was asked by a Congressman in the question-answer session: "I'll be doing a number of network interviews on the Obama Health Care Plan. If I am asked what is the one word to describe the plan what should I answer."

The answer is simple, honest, direct, analytical, sad but truthful. I told him that one word is FASCIST.

Then I added, "I hope you'll have the courage to use that word, Congressman. No other word is more appropriate."

Dr. Dave Janda, MD, is an orthopedic surgeon, and a world-recognized expert on the prevention of sports injuries, particularly in children. His website is noinjury.com .